[BlitzArde] EnterTheJake old note appeal.

[Jake]

BYOND account: EnterTheJake

Ban/note type (Check what applies):antag ban
() - Server Ban: all
() - Note: a/n
() - Forum Ban: a/n
() - Discord Ban: a/n

Ban/note length: permanent
Ban/note reason: Banned from Roles: Abductor, Xenomorph, Blob, Blood Brother, Changeling, Cultist, Heretic, Hivemind Host, Malf AI, Space Ninja, Operative, Syndicate Mutineer, Revolutionary, Revenant, Head Revolutionary, Spider, Spy, Syndicate, Traitor, Wizard, Voidwalker permanently - Antag Ban - Two rounds in a row AFK shortly after round started and came back only after being given antagonist role. Seemed like clear cut antag rolling, though an appeal after some time would not be improper.
Time ban was placed: 2024-12-11 14:47:20
Server you were playing on when banned: manuel
Round ID in which ban was placed: Round 245241


Why are you making this appeal?(Check what applies):
(X) - The ban/note is factually incorrect: yes
() - The ban/note is not against the rules: no
() - The ban/note needs modification: yes
(X) - The ban was unjustifiably harsh: yes
(X) - I was permabanned and I want another chance: no

Why should this appeal be accepted?:

Even though several months have passed and how the ban in question has been removed since January, the circumstances that lead to this suspension. never really sat right with me.

during the last 2 years or so I don't recall ever going afk at the start of the round, and to at least do something for the first 30 to 45 minutes before disconnecting, the couple of weeks before the ban was applied I had made a genuine effort into being more active in rounds (this would require some scouring from the admin team, sorry for that)

Prior to the ban I had conversations with Xzero and Vekter about my playstyle and how it could have been seen as antag rolling, but after some clarifications, they seemed to agree it wasn't the case.

Even in the peanut trade that was made about the ban, one of the acting headmins was of the opinion that I had no intention of antag rolling. viewtopic.php?f=83&t=37961

In the round the banning took place , I was chatting with another contributor (NecromancerAnne) about the balance implications of a PR for the first 15 minutes or so, this was on extreme low pop round.

I don't think it's unreasonable but alt tab for a few minutes chat at that pop range.

For the record, I'm not saying i was 100% innocent, I did have the habit to occasionaly alt tab to code for my prs during rounds, a habit that is now past me.

However considering how my prior conversations with the admin team ended on a positive note and how my record was clean for more than 2 years, the action was way too harsh and I regret not appealing it before.

[Justice12354]

So, just to make sure I'm getting it right, you want the note removed altogether, correct?

[NecromancerAnne]

I would like to chime in to say that at the time this ban took place, I was indeed discussing the particulars of this PR with him and was taking up an amount of his time. https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/88482

Balanceposting takes a lot of your time and focus, believe me. A quick look at the PR itself shows people can have a lot to say.

[Jake]

So, just to make sure I'm getting it right, you want the note removed altogether, correct?

Given prior conversations indicated I wasn't at fault, I think using a couple of deadpop rounds wasn't the proper staging for this ban, yes.

I'd like for the note to be removed.

[Justice12354]

Why are you making this appeal?(Check what applies):
() - The ban/note is factually incorrect: no
() - The ban/note is not against the rules: no
() - The ban/note needs modification: yes
(X) - The ban was unjustifiably harsh: yes
(X) - I was permabanned and I want another chance: no

I am slightly confused here. So, according to you, the note is factually correct, and the action it concerns is against the rules. Since it has now become a note, it cannot be unjustifiably harsh because it's the least harsh reality, unless you want me to go back in time and unban you. So, in order for me to remove it, this note has to be either factually incorrect or the action it concerns must not be against the rules.

From everything I've read regarding the topic, you seem to agree that your actions were inadequate and, as you've pointed out here, it is a habit beyond you. So, what I'm getting is that you did an oopsie (doing pr stuff and returning upon getting antag), and corrected yourself (stopped going afk). While I can see how the ban could've been a note, I really can't do anything about it now.

Currently the only grounds I can find for removing this note is out of pity, which is not really something we do.

Why must this note be removed? Or what do you believe needs modification in it?

[Jake]

Why are you making this appeal?(Check what applies):
() - The ban/note is factually incorrect: no
() - The ban/note is not against the rules: no
() - The ban/note needs modification: yes
(X) - The ban was unjustifiably harsh: yes
(X) - I was permabanned and I want another chance: no

I am slightly confused here. So, according to you, the note is factually correct, and the action it concerns is against the rules. Since it has now become a note, it cannot be unjustifiably harsh because it's the least harsh reality, unless you want me to go back in time and unban you. So, in order for me to remove it, this note has to be either factually incorrect or the action it concerns must not be against the rules.

From everything I've read regarding the topic, you seem to agree that your actions were inadequate and, as you've pointed out here, it is a habit beyond you. So, what I'm getting is that you did an oopsie (doing pr stuff and returning upon getting antag), and corrected yourself (stopped going afk). While I can see how the ban could've been a note, I really can't do anything about it now.

Currently the only grounds I can find for removing this note is out of pity, which is not really something we do.

Why must this note be removed? Or what do you believe needs modification in it?

You are right, I forgot to cross the first paragraph.

I actually think it's both, the action was unfair, and even if I was guilty of the thing I got accused of, it was way too extreme.

When I said I wasn't 100% innocent (I'm an ESL speaker, so forgive me if my phrasing is not exceptional) , I meant I now understand how my behavior could give the wrong impression, even though I had no intention nor did anything that could be classified as serial antag rolling, (You can check the previous rounds prior to the ban, I remember being fairly active during that month)

I main station engineer, which is a job that has plenty of downtime, if the station is functional and there's no need for assistance, I assumed there was no harm in taking a few minutes to alt tab and do some coding on the side, I was never really disconnected the game was still open, and I kept tabs on the Canary app just in case any emergency occured.

I did talk to Xzero and Vekter about it and they both assumed that what I did couldn't be chalked down to antag rolling, so I assumed I was in the clear.

The" whoopsie" in question was just a coincidence; I had a chat with NecroAnne, the chat concluded after I got antag, and If I can appeal a little bit to common sense here, I think it's a bit extreme to hound people when the station is completely deserted, else every campbell static would have received an antag ban by default.

So yeah, I think Blitz was in the wrong here and I'd like the note to be removed.

[Justice12354]

Well, this is certainly a tricky one...

Technically, you are in the wrong because you let yourself get caught in this type of scenario. As Timber pointed out in the last appeal, if you want the freedom to hop out out of the game and back in without being accused of antag roll, then you have to disable your antags.

Antag rolling is notoriously one of our hardest-to-prove rule breaches, so noting over a seemingly obvious incident that takes happens twice in a row is a valid punishment (I'm treating this as a note and not a ban because that's what I'm currently handling). This note effectively says "Stop going afk with your antags enabled, that shit's hella sus and it leans into antag rolling".

Since you said you're no longer going AFK at random and returning, and given the overall context, I am able to put in enough good faith as to how you're not gonna repeat this, or let yourself get caught in this again, and remove the note altogether.

Do keep in mind that, from what I've seen, Blitz's ruling wasn't entirely incorrect (maybe a bit overly harsh, but not wholly incorrect), so don't take this as a "Feel free to go back to doing that", else you might find yourself in the same sheets.

[Justice12354]

The note has now been deleted from your admin remarks history.